Does the study of history place too much on the individual, did the groups of people whose identities have been forgotten make the most significant history events trends. Some history events doubtedly were made by the groups of unforgotten people. However, from my point of view, both individual that advocate and guide the history events and the groups of people influence the development ofhistory.
There is no doubt that individual play the critical role in the history events, they lead and adovocate the development of history. There is an example To illustrate clealy this problem. Martin luther King, the leader of the movementof slavery liberty, have a great influence on the liverty of slavery, his speech " I have a dream" is a well- known one which greately promote the entusiansim on  the movement, And huarriat Tubman,help the slavors to escape from their hosts by makeing use of the Under railroad. the contemporary people always keep in mind that it is these leaders and advocators that creat the history events.
However, there are numerous people whoes identitied have been forgotten, they lay the solid foundation on the developement of history events. such as THe Boston Tea Party, which is the key event in the growth of American revolution; A group of  colonists boarded the ships and destoryed the tea by throwing  it t o BOston harber after officials inBoston refused to return three shiploads of taxed tea to britain. it is the grop of people that creat the history event. THere are numerous examples that are similar to what I have mentioned above, But how many people could keep in their mind these heroes,
Why   researchers and scholars always place too much emphasis on the individual of history events. In the early 1950's, historians who studied preindustrial Europe began, for the first time in early numbers, to investigate more of the preindustrial Europe population than the 2 or 3 percent who comprised  the political and social elite: the king, the gerenals,judges,nobles, bishops, and local magnates who had hither to usually filled history books. however, one difficulty, was that few of the remaining 97 percent recorded their thought or had them chronicled by comtemporaries,Faced with this situation, many historians based their investigations on the only records that seems to exist:birth. marriage,and death records. one way out of this dilemma was to turn to the records of legal courts, for here the voices of the nonelite and most often be heard, as witnesses, plaintiffs, and defendants. act as "a point of entry into the mental world of the poor"  extract the case histories, which have illuminated the attitudes toward crime and the law of different social groups
In my view, there are two reasons to explain this phenomena. THe first is that individual could perform his unusual personality in the process of history events while the group of people just indicate their characteristic and feature, and individual always coudl be documented. the second reason that I believe is that historian could record precisely the individual while they cannot prescribe the members of the groups whoes have been forgotten.